From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!torn!utcsri!rpi!usc!sdd.hp.com!decwrl!mcnc!aurs01!throop Tue Jun 23 13:21:01 EDT 1992
Article 6292 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!torn!utcsri!rpi!usc!sdd.hp.com!decwrl!mcnc!aurs01!throop
>From: throop@aurs01.UUCP (Wayne Throop)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: 5-step program to AI
Message-ID: <60840@aurs01.UUCP>
Date: 17 Jun 92 20:06:41 GMT
References: <1992Jun16.213227.31307@mp.cs.niu.edu> <60835@aurs01.UUCP> <1992Jun17.181322.7736@mp.cs.niu.edu>
Sender: news@aurs01.UUCP
Lines: 19

> rickert@mp.cs.niu.edu (Neil Rickert)
> In computers we string together sequences of atomic items from a discrete
> set, typically either ASCII characters or binary digits (depending on what
> level you want to view it).  Human string together sequences of phonemes
> from their language, which are also atomic items from a discrete set.  Is
> there all that much difference?

I think there is, primarily in the mechanisms which form the
composition rules, and hence in the classes of sequences that tend to
get put together.

The more important difference is the mechanisms by which current
computers and humans employ and manipulate abstractions seem likely to
be very different indeed.  As different as the differences between the
mechanisms behind Deep Thought or Belle's sequences of chess moves, and
a human's sequences of chess moves, even if they are similar
sequences.

Wayne Throop       ...!mcnc!aurgate!throop


